Ministry of Justice

The scope of legal aid is set out under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, and applicants are subject to a means and merits test. There are limited circumstances where legal aid may be available for pursuing a compensation claim; this includes claims in relation to abuse by a public authority of its position or powers, and claims involving a breach of convention rights by a public authority subject to the statutory means and merits tests.

Where an issue falls outside the scope of legal aid, funding may still be available through the Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) Scheme, where it would breach or risk a breach of human rights or retained enforceable EU law if funding is not provided, subject to the statutory means and merits tests.

HMCTS does not hold data on lost sitting days as a result of planned or unplanned maintenance, prior to 4 October 2021.

The youth justice statistics collection is published on GOV.UK. Within these, monthly statistics on children and young people within the secure estate are released, including the ethnic background of children in custody. The latest publication providing data on those present in custody can be found via the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/youth-custody-data

Population data is also published as part of the annual report, with the most recent release covering the year ending March 2020 and the next update due for publication 27 January.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/youth-justice-statistics-2019-to-2020

Data includes those aged under 18, and 18-year olds. Some 18-year olds remain in the secure estate for children and young people if they only have a short period of their sentence to serve, to avoid disrupting their regimes.

The Government believes that the right to speak freely and debate issues without fear of censure is a vital part of a democratic society, and that libel proceedings should not be used to impede and frustrate that debate.

The reforms we introduced in the Defamation Act 2013 have helped to rebalance the law to offer more effective protection for freedom of speech. In particular, by tightening the test to be applied by the courts in relation to libel actions brought against people who are not domiciled in the UK.

The Crown Prosecution Service can choose to refer the case to the Attorney General, and if she agrees, she can ask the Court of Appeal to review whether the law needs to be clarified. This would not change the outcome of this specific case.

Through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, we are in the process of changing the law to ensure that those found guilty of desecrating or damaging a memorial face a punishment that better reflects the high sentimental and emotional impact these actions can have.

Details of the department’s total floor area in each year are published as part of the annual State of the Estate report.

The most recent report can be found at the following link: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1040332/CCS118_CCS1021490260-001_State_of_the_Estate_Report_PAGES.pdf

The number of people admitted to prison for failing to pay magistrates’ court fines in respect of the non-payment of a TV licence in 2019 was two or fewer (the actual number has not been released in order to protect against personal identification), none of whom were women.

In any case where there is an acquittal in the Crown Court, the Attorney General has the power to ask the Court of Appeal for its opinion on a point of law which arose in the case.

The Attorney General is carefully considering whether to make such a referral.

The table below shows the latest published data on the number of disposals in the Crown Courts in England and Wales from 2016 to 2021. This data can be found on the criminal court statistics information page.

The table below shows the latest published data on the number of disposals of criminal cases in the Magistrates’ Courts from 2016 to 2021. This data can be found on the criminal court statistics information page.

For further data on disposals including by each Crown Court and by region in the Magistrates’ court please see the Crown Court cases received, disposed and outstanding tool and the Magistrates' courts cases received, disposed and outstanding tool available at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-court-statistics-quarterly-april-to-june-2021.

We do not hold information on the number of courts in England and Wales with secure docks that have closed since 2012.

The decision to close any court is not taken lightly, it only happens following full public consultation and only where sufficient capacity existed in other nearby courts to accommodate the work of the closing courts, and where suitable facilities, such as secure docks are available. Courts that have closed were either underused, dilapidated or too close to one another.

Acquisitive crime is when the offender derives material gain from the crime, such as theft, burglary, fraud and robbery. Acquisitive crime, which includes catalytic converter theft, is a Home Office responsibility. Nonetheless the Government is committed to tackling the theft of catalytic converters, working closely with police and motor manufacturers through the National Vehicle Crime Working Group, established by the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for vehicle crime and overseen by the Government’s Crime and Justice Taskforce, to determine what more can be done.

The Government enacted the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 which has been instrumental in tackling this crime. The Government also funded the set-up of the National Infrastructure Crime Reduction Partnership (NICRP), which ensures national co-ordination of policing and law enforcement partners to tackle metal theft, including the theft of catalytic converters. It provides training to law enforcement and other partner agencies, shares intelligence to target offenders, and implements crime prevention measures. The British Transport Police, through the NICRP, has conducted two national weeks of actions, which resulted in 64 arrests, over 1,400 stopped vehicles and over 1,000 catalytic converters and other items of stolen property were recovered.

As of our latest data collection on 31 March 2021, there were 146 transgender women (that is, prisoners who were legally male and identified as female) in all prisons across England and Wales.

Of these, fewer than five transgender prisoners were housed in the women’s estate. These figures do not include transgender prisoners with gender recognition certificates, although information on these individuals will be published early this year.

On the offences committed by individuals, we are only able to provide figures for the offence or offences that have led to an individual’s current imprisonment. To provide offence information for previous convictions would involve a complex data matching exercise which would exceed the prohibitive cost threshold for responding to a Parliamentary Question. Previous convictions, along with other relevant information, are considered, however, as part of the risk assessment set out in the Care and Management of Individuals who are Transgender Policy 2019.

On current offences, in the men’s estate, there were 87 transgender women with a conviction for at least one sexual offence. In the women’s estate, the number of transgender women with a conviction for at least one sexual offence was fewer than 5. This includes prisoners with a GRC.

Where transgender prisoners with GRCs are deemed too high risk to be held in the general women's estate, they can be held on E Wing, part of HMP Downview. This allows them to be held separately with only supervised contact with other women.

A total of 1,096 prisoners in women’s prisons have tested positive for COVID-19 from March 2020 to November 2021. Data on the number of prisoners who tested positive for COVID-19 was published in the November edition of the HM Prison and Probation Service COVID-19 statistics monthly series. The data for December 2021 is due to be published on 14 January 2022.

The total number of prisoners in women’s prisons who have tested positive for COVID-19 each month between March 2020 and November 2021 is given in the following table.

Table 1: Number of prisoners tested positive for COVID-19 in the women's estate each month from March 2020 to November 2021.

Data Quality

Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system. Much of the data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic has been done at pace, with recording practices evolving as we understand more about the requirements and conditions we are facing. In order to present the timeliest information, the data presented in this report have not been subjected to the usual standard of quality assurance associated with official statistics.

Notes:

1). The data for the latest month are provisional due to the time lag between taking the test and recording of the results on the central data collection.

2). Values (c) are confidential to prevent disclosure of individuals.

The number of staff in women’s prisons who have tested positive for covid-19 each month between March 2020 and October 2021 is given in the following table.

Table 2: COVID-19 Positive test results for staff^1,2 working in Women's prisons, by directly/non-directly employed, March 2020 to October 2021³

Source: MoJ/HMPPS administrative systems and data collections

Data Quality: Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system. Much of the data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic has been done at pace, with recording practices evolving as we understand more about the requirements and conditions we are facing.

Notes:

1). Counts the distinct staff who have tested positive for COVID-19. These are self-reported.

2). Where staff have multiple positive tests within a 90-day period, they are now assumed to be from the same infection and are therefore only counted once. This has resulted in a small number of positive tests being removed from the published figures.

3). October 2021 is the latest published data. The next set of data for the period to 30 January 2022 is due to be published in the Workforce Statistics Report on 17 February 2022.

~ denotes suppressed values of 2 or fewer, or other values (including zeroes) which would allow values of 2 or fewer to be derived by subtraction. Low numbers are suppressed to prevent disclosure in accordance with the Data Protection Act, 2018.

A total of 1,096 prisoners in women’s prisons have tested positive for COVID-19 from March 2020 to November 2021. Data on the number of prisoners who tested positive for COVID-19 was published in the November edition of the HM Prison and Probation Service COVID-19 statistics monthly series. The data for December 2021 is due to be published on 14 January 2022.

The total number of prisoners in women’s prisons who have tested positive for COVID-19 each month between March 2020 and November 2021 is given in the following table.

Table 1: Number of prisoners tested positive for COVID-19 in the women's estate each month from March 2020 to November 2021.

Data Quality

Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system. Much of the data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic has been done at pace, with recording practices evolving as we understand more about the requirements and conditions we are facing. In order to present the timeliest information, the data presented in this report have not been subjected to the usual standard of quality assurance associated with official statistics.

Notes:

1). The data for the latest month are provisional due to the time lag between taking the test and recording of the results on the central data collection.

2). Values (c) are confidential to prevent disclosure of individuals.

The number of staff in women’s prisons who have tested positive for covid-19 each month between March 2020 and October 2021 is given in the following table.

Table 2: COVID-19 Positive test results for staff^1,2 working in Women's prisons, by directly/non-directly employed, March 2020 to October 2021³

Source: MoJ/HMPPS administrative systems and data collections

Data Quality: Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system. Much of the data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic has been done at pace, with recording practices evolving as we understand more about the requirements and conditions we are facing.

Notes:

1). Counts the distinct staff who have tested positive for COVID-19. These are self-reported.

2). Where staff have multiple positive tests within a 90-day period, they are now assumed to be from the same infection and are therefore only counted once. This has resulted in a small number of positive tests being removed from the published figures.

3). October 2021 is the latest published data. The next set of data for the period to 30 January 2022 is due to be published in the Workforce Statistics Report on 17 February 2022.

~ denotes suppressed values of 2 or fewer, or other values (including zeroes) which would allow values of 2 or fewer to be derived by subtraction. Low numbers are suppressed to prevent disclosure in accordance with the Data Protection Act, 2018.

This Government is committed to reducing crime by tackling reoffending. We know the likelihood of ex-offenders reoffending is significantly decreased if they have a home, a job and access to healthcare, including substance misuse treatment. We are building on the investment made in 2021 by spending £200 million a year by 2024-25 to address these factors and ensure prison leavers have a strong foundation on release.

Our Prisons Strategy White Paper, published in December, sets out our vision for reducing reoffending. This includes our aim that no-one subject to probation supervision is released from prison homeless. We are therefore expanding our new Community Accommodation Service, which currently provides up to twelve weeks temporary housing in five regions, to support the thousands of people in England and Wales who leave prison each year without accommodation.

We plan to transform how prisons get offenders into work. We will open our doors to the private sector to overhaul the opportunities for work offered in prisons, on Release on Temporary Licence and on release. We will do this by implementing dedicated Employment Advisors in prisons, developing a digital tool that will match prisoners to jobs and establishing local employment boards to link prisons with business networks.

We will also introduce new Resettlement Passports, which will be set up prior to release and will bring together the key information and services that an individual needs to resettle into society.

The total number of prison sites which have provision for, and operational in-cell devices provided by Coracle is currently 21. There will also be approximately 300 more devices being deployed across an additional 20 sites in total by the end of January 2022. The table below breaks down the figures for the number of these in-cell devices by prison.

The total number of prison sites which have provision for, and operational in-cell devices by other providers (MoJ D&T managed in-cell technology devices) is currently 8 with an additional 7 sites planned for deployment by the end of 2022. The table below breaks down the figures for the number of these in-cell devices by prison, currently deployed, together with the sites that have the infrastructure deployed, with device and digital services deployment planned for this year:

In the year ending March 2019 there were 9,193 positive random drug tests in prisons in England and Wales (16.9% of all tests taken). This was published in the HMPPS Annual Digest: April 2018 to March 2019 – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). In the year ending March 2020 there were 7,275 positive random drug tests in England and Wales (14% of all tests taken). This was published in the HMPPS Annual Digest: April 2019 to March 2020 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).

Data for the year to March 2021 is not comparable to previous years due to a significant reduction in testing volumes caused by the impact of COVID-19 in prisons. As a result, random drug testing data was not reported in the HMPPS Annual Digest: April 2020 to March 2021 – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). in the usual format. However, it is noted in the Digest that in the 12 months to March 2021, there were 4,738 random mandatory drug tests (rMDT) carried out nationally in total, of which 606 (12.8%) gave a positive result.

As at 31 December 2021, 61 prisons operated with a population above their Certified Normal Accommodation (CNA) but not above their operational capacity. The operational capacity of a prison is the total number of prisoners that an establishment can accommodate and is determined by the Prison Group Director.

CNA, or uncrowded capacity, is the Prison Service’s own measure of accommodation. CNA represents the good, decent standard of accommodation that the Service aspires to provide all prisoners. Where operational capacity of a prison is higher than the CNA it will be classed as having the potential to be 'crowded', which can mean prisoners share cells.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) publishes monthly individual prison population and capacity information through the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/prison-population-statistics

The outcome of the Rule Committee’s continuing discussion is awaited and Ministry of Justice officials are participating. The Committee will be pleased to describe that discussion in full detail and to supply the hon. Member with copies of its papers. Its secretary will write to him with those documents.

The table below shows the latest published data on the number of disposals in the Crown Courts in the last three years. This data can be found on the criminal court statistics information page.

The table below shows the latest published data on the number of disposals of criminal cases in the Magistrates’ Courts in the last three years. This data can be found on the criminal court statistics information page

The End of Custody Temporary Release scheme (ECTR) operated between April and August 2020. Full eligibility details were published at the time. These included minimising the risk to public protection, with those assessed as a high risk of serious harm or convicted of sexual or violent offences excluded; only those who were already close to release and had already served at least half of their time in prison were eligible. In order to comply with contemporaneous Government directions on Covid-19 prisoners would have to have suitable accommodation and healthcare provision available outside of custody.

When considering who would be eligible for the scheme, establishments assessed their entire populations to find those potentially eligible based on sentence length, and offence type among other factors. Those who met the initial criteria were then assessed based on their behaviour in custody and healthcare needs among other factors prior to deciding if they were suitable for release. Data on the number of prisoners who reached the final stages of risk assessment for the ECTR could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The End of Custody Temporary Release scheme (ECTR) operated between April and August 2020. Full eligibility details were published at the time. These included minimising the risk to public protection, with those assessed as a high risk of serious harm or convicted of sexual or violent offences excluded; only those who were already close to release and had already served at least half of their time in prison were eligible. In order to comply with contemporaneous Government directions on Covid-19 prisoners would have to have suitable accommodation and healthcare provision available outside of custody.

When considering who would be eligible for the scheme, establishments assessed their entire populations to find those potentially eligible based on sentence length, and offence type among other factors. Those who met the initial criteria were then assessed based on their behaviour in custody and healthcare needs among other factors prior to deciding if they were suitable for release. Data on the number of prisoners who reached the final stages of risk assessment for the ECTR could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

A prisoner is released in error if they are released earlier than their correct release date, they will be unlawfully at large until and unless they are subsequently released correctly or returned to custody. If the person released is not aware of the error and makes no attempt to evade arrest, then they have committed no offence and, in that sense, they may not be at fault.

Releases in error are monitored closely to analyse the frequency across the estate and identify any trends nationally, while taking into consideration the management of risk to the public.

(i) How many prisoners released in error had been convicted of rape; and for how long these prisoners remained at large before being returned to custody

If a request is made for information where very small numbers are involved, the MoJ must consider whether this could lead to the identification of individuals. Since the total number of prisoners released in error where their main offence was rape is two or fewer, we are not able to give further details either by year or for the whole period.

(a) The most current information on waiting times to first hearing is set out in the table below.

(b) We aim to work within the general correspondence targets and upload judgments to the public register within 10 working days of promulgation.

¹ Single claims are made by a sole employee/worker, relating to alleged breaches of employment rights

² Multiple claims are where two or more people bring proceedings arising out of the same facts, usually against a common employer. In this instance the lead multiple claim would be listed for hearing.

Data are taken from a live management information system and can change over time. Data are management information and are not subject to the same level of checks as official statistics.

The data provided is the most recent available and for that reason might differ from any previously published information.

Data has not been cross referenced with case files.

Although care is taken when processing and analysing the data, the details are subject to inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale case management system and is the best data that is available.

Published statistics can be found on www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunal-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2020 and information on Employment Tribunal outcomes can be found on www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions.

Published Management Information (used by HMCTS for understanding workload volumes and timeliness at a national level during COVID-19): HMCTS weekly management information during coronavirus - March 2020 to May 2021 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

The most recent Employment Tribunal data covers the period up to March 2021. This is because the Employment Tribunal has moved to a new case management system and HMCTS is currently working to incorporate the new IT system alongside longer-established data sources to provide a more complete and consistent data set for this jurisdiction.

National statistics on the number of prosecutions and the sentences imposed under the ‘The Botulinum Toxin and Cosmetic Fillers (Children) Act 2021’ for the calendar year of 2021 are due for publication in May 2022.

The Government recognises the great importance of the effective and timely handling of correspondence.

The delay in responding to your letters of the 25 October and 23 November 2021 was the result of an administrative error. We have now responded to both letters.

HMCTS does not hold court sittings data that provides this level of detail.

Since 4 October 2021 HMCTS has been explicitly capturing the effect of planned and unplanned maintenance on our estate, and this has resulted in the lost availability of 754 courtroom days up to 1 January 2022. This represents less than 1% of sitting days during this period. Not all lost courtroom days result in a lost sitting day as these can be transferred to other rooms, if available.

The HMCTS estate is kept under regular review and priority is given to ensuring that buildings are safe, secure, meet statutory requirements and protect continuity of service.

Data on the weights of drug finds by individual types of (a) Class A, (b) Class B and (c) Class C drugs is published here (Chart 9, 2_b) from 2017 to 2021. It is not possible to split the total weight of drugs found in prisons by type or class of drug, so it is not possible to publish the data on drug weights by class of drug.

The backlog in the family court at Barnet for private and public law case is as shown in the table below. Average timeliness in weeks has been provided also. Barnet is part of the West London Designated Family Court area. To give context the data for the whole area is also provided.

The administration and senior judiciary are working closely together to increase the sitting capacity across the West London Cluster, which comprises of West London Family Court and Barnet County Court, and to re-balance the arrears of work across the region. Sitting days in the West London area have increased by 25%, comparing the financial year September 2021 to the same period in 2020.

In recognition of the pressures on family work across the West London estate, a Nightingale Court was created at Petty France with four additional courts. Additional courts are also being utilised in the Royal Courts of Justice.

The increased use of digital hearings in family have allowed the court to use more part-time judiciary and increase the number of hearings heard on a remote basis, and the introduction of a new pilot (known as Pilot Practice Direction 36Q*) is enabling the court to progress private law cases through the system more quickly by introducing early triage and case management between issue and the first hearing.

*PD36Q New Pilot Practice Direction 36Q came into force from 23 April 2020. Pilot PD36Q modifies PD12B (Child Arrangements Programme) to provide temporary local flexibility over procedures for progressing applications for Child Arrangements Orders.

The backlog in the family court at Barnet for private and public law case is as shown in the table below. Average timeliness in weeks has been provided also. Barnet is part of the West London Designated Family Court area. To give context the data for the whole area is also provided.

The administration and senior judiciary are working closely together to increase the sitting capacity across the West London Cluster, which comprises of West London Family Court and Barnet County Court, and to re-balance the arrears of work across the region. Sitting days in the West London area have increased by 25%, comparing the financial year September 2021 to the same period in 2020.

In recognition of the pressures on family work across the West London estate, a Nightingale Court was created at Petty France with four additional courts. Additional courts are also being utilised in the Royal Courts of Justice.

The increased use of digital hearings in family have allowed the court to use more part-time judiciary and increase the number of hearings heard on a remote basis, and the introduction of a new pilot (known as Pilot Practice Direction 36Q*) is enabling the court to progress private law cases through the system more quickly by introducing early triage and case management between issue and the first hearing.

*PD36Q New Pilot Practice Direction 36Q came into force from 23 April 2020. Pilot PD36Q modifies PD12B (Child Arrangements Programme) to provide temporary local flexibility over procedures for progressing applications for Child Arrangements Orders.

The government is reviewing the statutory maximum penalty available for the offence of sexual penetration of a corpse under section 70 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. This review is taking place alongside the independent inquiry into the events surrounding David Fuller’s horrific offending in hospitals in Kent. That inquiry is due to publish interim findings shortly, with a final report published at a later date. Our review of available maximum penalties is likely to follow similar timescales, to ensure findings from the wider inquiry can be taken into account.

The current statutory maximum penalty is for one offence; where more than one offence is sentenced at the same time, each offence will be sentenced individually and the overall sentence passed will reflect the totality of offending behaviour, which may mean sentences being served consecutively. Our review of the statutory maximum penalty is considering instances of the commission of multiple, as well as single, offences.

The government is reviewing the statutory maximum penalty available for the offence of sexual penetration of a corpse under section 70 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. This review is taking place alongside the independent inquiry into the events surrounding David Fuller’s horrific offending in hospitals in Kent. That inquiry is due to publish interim findings shortly, with a final report published at a later date. Our review of available maximum penalties is likely to follow similar timescales, to ensure findings from the wider inquiry can be taken into account.

The current statutory maximum penalty is for one offence; where more than one offence is sentenced at the same time, each offence will be sentenced individually and the overall sentence passed will reflect the totality of offending behaviour, which may mean sentences being served consecutively. Our review of the statutory maximum penalty is considering instances of the commission of multiple, as well as single, offences.

The Deputy Prime Minister and I have been and are committed to visiting establishments across the youth estate in the coming months, subject to the “National Framework” which controls measures for preventing Covid transmission.

Work continues to be undertaken on the redistribution of work to help support East London Family Court. Capacity across the estate is being fully utilised and Financial Remedy and Public Law cases continue to be heard at the Royal Courts of Justice and the Nightingale Court at Petty France. Pilot Practice Directorate 36Q has also been implemented at East London Family Court (New Pilot Practice Direction 36Q came into force from 23 April 2020. Pilot PD36Q modifies PD12B (Child Arrangements Programme) to provide temporary local flexibility over procedures for progressing applications for Child Arrangements Orders).

As a result of the continuing exceptionally high receipts of Private Law work at East London Family Court, along with the continuing pressures on judicial recruitment and Cafcass resource, it has been agreed with the Senior Judiciary that some of this work will initially be heard at Central and West London Family Courts with a longer plan of transferring some of the East London postcodes to these courts to balance the waiting times across the region.

The impact of the rebalancing exercise is unlikely to show for several months due to the nature of how cases are listed. However, despite continuing pressures, outstanding cases remain fairly static with 2299 at the end of October and 2251 at the end of December.

OPT Report - FamilyMan Private Law Workload and Performance (BY CASE)

Information on theft offences held by the Ministry of Justice does not identify if a pet, specifically, was stolen. The information may be held on court record but to be able to identify cases in which pets were stolen would require access to individual court records which would be of disproportionate cost.

The Ministry of Justice has published information on sentences for offenders convicted for more general theft offences, up to December 2020, available in the ‘Outcomes by Offence’ data tool, here:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987715/outcomes-by-offence-2020.xlsx

In April 2020 we leased an additional 2,000 electronic monitoring tags to support our End of Custody Temporary Release scheme to limit the spread and impact of Covid-19 in prions. This was based on early estimates that up to 4,000 prisoners could be eligible. Early release on tag was one element of our approach. Other measures included reducing numbers on remand, creating extra cells, limited prisoner movements, isolating prisoners with symptoms, shielding the vulnerable and quarantining new arrivals.

In considering these early releases, the priority of HM Prison and Probation Service was to put the safety of the public first, which is why offenders needed to meet strict eligibility criteria and pass a risk assessment to be released early.

Between April 2020 when the scheme was introduced and August 2020 when the scheme was paused, 262 prisoners were released with an electronic tag. A number of surplus tags were also used elsewhere in the criminal justice system in support of our ambition to make full use of the benefits of electronic monitoring technology.

We continue to keep the options for reducing the impact of Covid-19 in the prison estate under review. However, at this stage there are no plans to reintroduce the End of Custody Temporary Release scheme.

In April 2020 we leased an additional 2,000 electronic monitoring tags to support our End of Custody Temporary Release scheme to limit the spread and impact of Covid-19 in prions. This was based on early estimates that up to 4,000 prisoners could be eligible. Early release on tag was one element of our approach. Other measures included reducing numbers on remand, creating extra cells, limited prisoner movements, isolating prisoners with symptoms, shielding the vulnerable and quarantining new arrivals.

In considering these early releases, the priority of HM Prison and Probation Service was to put the safety of the public first, which is why offenders needed to meet strict eligibility criteria and pass a risk assessment to be released early.

Between April 2020 when the scheme was introduced and August 2020 when the scheme was paused, 262 prisoners were released with an electronic tag. A number of surplus tags were also used elsewhere in the criminal justice system in support of our ambition to make full use of the benefits of electronic monitoring technology.

We continue to keep the options for reducing the impact of Covid-19 in the prison estate under review. However, at this stage there are no plans to reintroduce the End of Custody Temporary Release scheme.

In April 2020 we leased an additional 2,000 electronic monitoring tags to support our End of Custody Temporary Release scheme to limit the spread and impact of Covid-19 in prions. This was based on early estimates that up to 4,000 prisoners could be eligible. Early release on tag was one element of our approach. Other measures included reducing numbers on remand, creating extra cells, limited prisoner movements, isolating prisoners with symptoms, shielding the vulnerable and quarantining new arrivals.

In considering these early releases, the priority of HM Prison and Probation Service was to put the safety of the public first, which is why offenders needed to meet strict eligibility criteria and pass a risk assessment to be released early.

Between April 2020 when the scheme was introduced and August 2020 when the scheme was paused, 262 prisoners were released with an electronic tag. A number of surplus tags were also used elsewhere in the criminal justice system in support of our ambition to make full use of the benefits of electronic monitoring technology.

We continue to keep the options for reducing the impact of Covid-19 in the prison estate under review. However, at this stage there are no plans to reintroduce the End of Custody Temporary Release scheme.

A prisoner is released in error if they are released earlier than their correct release date, they will be unlawfully at large until and unless they are subsequently released correctly or returned to custody. If the person so released is not aware of the error and makes no attempt to evade arrest, then they have committed no offence and, in that sense, they may not be at fault.

Releases in error are monitored closely to analyse the frequency across the estate and identify any trends nationally, while taking into consideration the management of risk to the public.

Between 2010 and March 2021, 678 releases in error took place. I have asked officials to review methods of measuring rates of return, owing to the complexity of such data gathering. For example, if the prisoner was released one or two days early, they would not be recalled to prison, however, would be counted as still at large.

This data is not currently held, and information could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The government values the important role played by CILEX lawyers. As part of the Judicial Diversity Forum priorities for 2021/22, the government will explore fuller opportunities for Chartered Legal Executives to gain court experience, including advocacy.

HMCTS has embarked upon a transformative change agenda, with a view to modernise and improve the outcomes significantly for the users who rely on courts/tribunals, and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the system. Insofar as workload is concerned, the point of the system is to automate more, and make staff (and professional partner/user) lives easier, providing a more efficient and consistent service.

For stress and morale, the implementation of change always needs to be effectively managed. We are committed with supporting our workforce through this process, our longstanding daily team meetings across our courts provides a manager with a temperature check on how teams are feeling about change. Where stress indictors are apparent, a member of staff or their line manager will use an individual stress risk assessment to discuss, define and mitigate stress. Alongside that, our annual staff survey provides us with a real understanding of the impact change has on our staff.

For all consultations, the Department gives due consideration to the needs of the audience group and we take whatever action we can to improve reach and accessibility, including by following best practice through provision of accessible formats for consultation documents.

We have worked to ensure that the recently published Victims' Bill Consultation is as accessible as possible and that we enable the voices of stakeholders and victims to be heard. This has included making a large print version of the document available from launch (upon request), which we also shared with our key partners in the victims sector in December to strengthen availability further. We are also directly engaging with victims and specialist victim support organisations during the consultation period to overcome any issues of accessibility and maximize the opportunity for engagement.

We recognise the importance of the Criminal Justice System serving all communities and individuals in England and Wales. For it to do this, we need to understand the diverse make up of those it is serving.

The scorecard is a transformation in the way we will manage and improve future performance in the Criminal Justice System and, as our guiding principles, we are using the best data available to us. This means we do not currently have victim metrics which are broken down by protected characteristics.

The impact of prison officers self-isolating with Covid-19 across Merseyside and Lancashire alters daily. The numbers of staff in self-isolation are monitored at each prison and are reported to the Prison Group Director’s (PGD) Office daily, so if assistance is required it can be sought. There is a twice weekly Covid call with all prisons and their relevant PDG office to provide updates and support.

Different prisons face different risks, and preventative measures are implemented accordingly. All prisons have regime contingency plans in place that can respond if significant staff shortages occur and there is a national framework to provide support from outside of region within the Gold Command structure if required. All prisons within both regions are currently running regimes in line with the national Gold guidance and have sufficient staff to do so.

All prisons have control mechanisms to test staff and we follow national HMPPS guidance on isolation in all cases.